2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
REHMAT ALI Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, SHEIKHUPURA and another
| Citation | 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Punjab Service Tribunal |
| Bench Members | Fakhar Hayat, Member-V |
| Parties | REHMAT ALI Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, SHEIKHUPURA and another |
| Primary Law | Punjab Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (IV of 2000) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Removal from Service (Special Powers) Ordinance (IV of 2000) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Punjab Service Tribunal bench comprising: Fakhar Hayat, Member-V.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (REHMAT ALI Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, SHEIKHUPURA and another). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Khadim Hussain Khokhar for Appellant.
- Manzoor Hussain Bhatti, D.A. for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 21st January, 2008.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 3 & 10
Punjab Service Tribunals Act (IX of 1974), S.4
Appellant, who was dismissed from service, filed departmental appeal and Appellate Authority came to the conclusion that plea of appellant carried some weight and .the Authority set aside punishment of dismissal from service and reinstated the appellant into service with immediate effect and period he remained out of service was treated as such
Appellant had grievance with respect to date of reinstatement and treatment of period intervening between his dismissal and reinstatement
While setting aside punishment of dismissal from service, appellant's reinstatement into service from date of order of reinstatement, was not correct as it should have been with effect from date of dismissal and intervening period should have been allowed as leave of the kind due
Impugned order passed by the authority was modified to the extent that appellant would be reinstated into service w.e.f. the date of dismissal from service and reinstatement would be treated as leave of kind due.
Judgment & Decree
FAKHAR HAYAT (MEMBER-V).
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was awarded punishment of dismissal from service by the respondent No.1 vide order dated 7-12-2007. The appellant preferred an appeal with respondent No.2 who vide order dated 28-12-2006 came to the conclusion that plea taken by the appellant carried some weight and in view of his explanation punishment of dismissal from service was set aside. He was reinstated into service with immediate effect and the period he remained out of service was treated as such. The appellant has grievance with respect to date of reinstatement and the nature of period intervening between dismissal and reinstatement of appellant.
2. In their parawise comments the respondents maintained that orders were passed in accordance with law.
3. Arguments advanced on behalf of the parties have been considered and available record gone through.
4. While setting aside punishment of dismissal from service the appellant was ordered to be reinstated into service with immediate effect i.e. from date of order, which was not correct. It should have been w.e.f. date of dismissal and intervening period should have been allowed as leave of the kind due.
5. For what has been discussed above, the appeal of the appellant is accepted and impugned order dated 28-12-2006 passed by respondent No.2 is modified to the extent that the appellant shall be reinstated into service w.e.f. date of dismissal from service and intervening period between dismissal from service and reinstatement shall be treated as leave of the kind due. H.B.T./6/PST Appeal accepted.